Posted on 10/04/2008 7:32:29 PM PDT by Dawnsblood
Something very spooky happened in the United States last week. The chances are you noticed it too, many days before it was reported.
Tuesday found me in New York, on my first stateside visit in a couple of years. The details of the Bailout plan had just been revealed and the slow burn of outrage was apparent everywhere. Admittedly, this was New York.
(Long-time readers will know I was the San Francisco correspondent for El Reg for six years and was frequently asked by Europeans: "What do Americans think of ... x?" To which the only honest answer is, "I can't tell you what Americans think, but here in San Francisco ...")
The outrage isn't the spooky part. The really odd thing is that if you had to rely on the mainstream US newspapers and TV channels - and nothing else - you'd wouldn't know something remarkable was happening. Which is that the Treasury Secretary's Bailout Plan had united parts of America who spend most of their energy hitting each other over the head, in common opposition to the proposal.
It was the moment that politicians dread the most. This was not merely an outbreak of popular discontent, but a phenomenon which breaks down those convenient labels the political marketing people like to use, to shield their masters from people's true desires and intentions. Not just coarse labels like "Left" and "Right" - but the really dumb, patronizing demographic ones like "Soccer Mom" and the nadir of modern politics, those found in Mark Penn's "Microtrends." Niche marketers will have to start from scratch.
Conservatives, libertarians, and lefties all raised objections to the Bailout for very sound reasons of their own.
(Excerpt) Read more at theregister.co.uk ...
What you are espousing as the so called will of the people is nothing more then anarchy under a Republican form of government. We elect people to make decisions and when you interfere with that process, you damage the republic and you move it further toward anarchy and mob rule. Constituent opinion is one thing, but when a untidy mob of threatening phone calls and messages based on incomplete or erroneous information becomes a political force, you have lost much and not won a damn thing.
Pesky thing that Democracy thing is.
And people like Friedman wish that we could be rid of it and impose Chinese energy policy for in a day.
It’s nothing new. Look at Liberal Fascism by Goldberg for example after example
Apparently nobody was in favor of the bailout but the politicians and the money men they work for.
However the the GOP and Democrat socialists in Congress prevailed and thwarted the will of the people.
I can only hope they pay for it. If their opponents are smart they will run on the platform of never voting for the phony bail out.
Believe it or not, Americans have a right to complain to their elected representatives. You may not like it, and complaining to politicians may not accomplish anything, but the right exists.
Just my two cents... The clowns in Washington had to work over time on a weekend... While average Joe America was home on the weekend, it was easy to see what D.C. was up to, cause for the most part, a big chunk of the citizens have the weekends off. It gave us time to actually watch these bozos, and call in, write our congressmen, etc...
Maybe congress should be forced to work on Saturdays and Sundays more often so the people can keep an eye on them... if they want a weekend, give them Monday and Tuesday.
Those are my thoughts. American’s aren’t done yet. We have a long way to go to get things right, but there’s a chance we’re headed in the right direction.
Interesting, that.
Correction...we HAD a republic.
We’ve amended it away (Seventeenth Amendment) and just plain ignored it.
I was at the local Republican Headquarters today in Reno, NV and saw our Congressman, Dean Heller. I went right up to him...looked him in the eye...shook his hand...smiled real big and said...Thank you for having the balls to say ‘No’ to the bailout!!! HAHAHAHA! He said....’Miss....you have no idea how many times I have heard that in the last few days’....LOL! Heller said there was no way he could get up every morning and face himself if he voted yes.... I joked....Be careful.... if the others found out you have a conscience they might try to steal it....
That's a good observation. I have another...it struck me this week that there is a pact on both sides in Washington not to do any "finger pointing". Exactly who does that serve....answer, the crooks on both sides don't get exposed and they can continue the operation of fleecing the masses. It's time to end the "pact" for the sake of the Country.
Though some compromise may eventually be passed, it is now clear that American political elites have lost the ability to quickly respond to a national challenge by imposing their collective will. What once seemed like politics as usual now seems more like the crisis of the Articles of Confederation -- a weak government populated by small men. And this must be more frightening to a world dependent on American stability than any bank failure.
Mr. Gerson:
You are missing the elephant in the room here. The world has changed.
I am sure you have heard the proverb that "knowledge is power."
Many, many more people have much more knowledge about many more things than ever before.
Before the internet exponentially increased the ability of average people to participate in a national political discussion, and before people trained themselves in debate, advocacy and political intricacies through virtual group discussions on talk radio, there was not much choice but to allow, and even defer to, elected officials on all matters large and small.
Yes, at least in modern times, voters have been able to write letters and make phone calls. But never in the history of the world have voters been able to (1) inform themselves, (2) test what they are told by the media (new and old) against discoverable facts, (3) test their views and ideas with other voters through talk radio and internet forums, and (4) communicate those informed and well-tested views to Congress on a massive scale.
This is a new chapter in the majesty of representative democracy, not a descent into a "weak government populated by small men."
To the contrary, to lead in these times will require "bigger" men---men who realize that it is not enough to pontificate. They must educate and persuade; in short, they must lead, and in ways that have not been required at any time in the past.
Even twenty years ago, few average Americans had an easy and accessible way to educate themselves on, say, the political history of Fannie Mae. They would have had no choice, really, but to accept what the MSM told them or act on vague notions rather than hard information.
That situation is now officially on the ash heap of history.
You lament that the "professionals" no longer have free rein to do, in most charitable terms, what they think is right for the country.
You are wrong. It's just that their obligation to persuade their constituents as to the right course is now rightly enforced.
Of course the "American people" as a political voice can be wrong. If they are, and our officials are not able to persuade them to a right course, or otherwise accommodate their views, the fix is simple: it is then the responsibility of our elected leaders to vote what is right for the country, in their judgment, despite the political cost.
You seem to neglect this point, as if elected representatives can only do the right thing if they are not being bothered by the input of the "American people."
Far from creating an image of an unstable America, the present interaction between the "American people" and elected officials demonstrated a particular robustness that is quintessentially American.
IOW, this new page in the ability and opportunity for massive political interaction has revealed that our quintessential American character of duty, honor, country---which was somewhat obsfucated by the Establishment Media monopoly of the past--- is, in fact, still going strong.
If men want to lead in this new day, they have to stop thinking of the "American people" as unwilling or unable to pay attention. They must stop thinking of the "American people" as unable or unwilling to understand "complicated" issues.
They must realize that they will have to work to gain support for their political acts.
They must accept that they now live in a political fishbowl that exponentially increases their accountability to voters.
This is nothing to be mourned.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2094665/posts
Rights also create the obligation to use that right wisely. That means knowing what you are talking about. It means recognizing when, and to what extent, you should, or must, rely on professional expertise and when, and to what extent, that’s not the case.
The question of the bailout, for example, involved many questions encompassing global economics that very few people have expertise in. It also involved questions of basic political philosophy and principle. There had to be a balance between the two.
Just as it’s appropriate for you to ask your brain surgeon all sorts of questions and convey to him concerns you want him to respect during the course of your treatment, there are also areas in which, if you’re wise, you’ll have to accept that you hired him to do a job and he, not you, has the expertise to do it.
Why take it to such an absurd length? Just to avoid the reality that, yes, there are some things upon which even you are I are rather "too stupid" (to use your terminology) to opine with authority---especially when the fate of our nation may be at stake?
I'm sure there are few conservatives who have not at one time or another marveled at how "stupid" so many Americans are, in that they keep clammoring for socialism and voting for idiots and thieves.
You see, it's not just the smart and well-informed people who can pipe up as expressing the "will of the people."
And I would hope you would agree that there are areas in which, no matter how smart and informed one is, one simply doesn't have the expertise, experience or opportunity to have sufficient grounds for reaching some of the conclusions fundamental to a huge policy question.
In short: most people understand when they need to call a lawyer or a plumber to get the job done by a professional!
Here, for example, there is no way anyone but those who are absolutey expert at working within the global financial markets could really evaluate whether a crash was coming. That doesn't mean the rest of us cannot have informed opinions on what principles should guide any response. But it has been rather stunning to hear non-economists, much less non-experts in the intricate labryniths of global financial markets, declare, "We don't need a bailout; we don't need to do anything."
That may, in fact, be right. If so, however, it was just a lucky guess. And I don't see "luck" as a method in these types of situations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.